Gm.
I’ve reviewed the proposal, and in general am supportive of such a thing. In terms of what the community pool could go towards, this is a great option, especially since the be will be around one million getting returned to the community pool from AA DAO shortly, and so this spend is roughly in line with that (i.e. won’t have to dig into the community pool so far).
I think it’s worth noting that this is the second proposal, and that the cost is much, much cheaper than last time. To me, that signals that such an integration is really wanted by the Stargaze team, and that it likely makes sense. In general, I am in support.
However, I don’t support the current milestone deliverables, which are:
| Milestone | Description | Amount (USDC) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Initial setup and technical planning | 400,000 |
| 2 | Launchpad and Studio migration | 200,000 |
| 3 | Marketplace migration | 200,000 |
| 4 | Name Service migration | 200,000 |
| 5 | NFT Collection migration | 500,000 |
| Total | 1,500,000 |
This is a 1.5m payment for various “migrations”. The truth is, migrations aren’t worth anything to the Hub. It’s the operation, growth, and maintenance of these integrations that are far more valuable. Also, 400k for “initial setup” is not a fair ask given there is no recourse for the Hub to claw this back if all the deliverables are not finalized. Instead, I would propose the following:
| Milestone | Description | Amount (USDC) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Initial setup and technical planning | 25,000 |
| 2 | Launchpad and Studio migration | 25,000 |
| 3 | Marketplace migration | 25,000 |
| 4 | Name Service migration | 10,000 |
| 5 | NFT Collection migration | 10,000 per top 10 NFT collection migrated (by mcap) |
| 6 Maintenance Payment | 75,000 per month for one year (define maintenance below) |
|---|---|
| 7 | Bonus Bucket | 1x Cosmos Hub fees generated (in ATOM), up to $505k |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 1,500,000 |
|---|
This is a much better structure. The Hub is paying roughly 100k for integration (which is what an integration should cost), and then funding the Stargaze team for one year. In return, Stargaze should not deploy on other platforms unless permission is granted by governance (for that year), and Stargaze’s trading activity should exclusively live on - forever - on the Cosmos Hub (unless governance releases it).
Minting and issuance can happen on other chains, but the Hub should be the place where trading happens. You can batch the (mint) → (ibc to Hub) → trade → (ibc out of Hub) → send transactions into one tx through Skip:Go, for example.
This way, the Hub is making an investment. We are buying your loyalty, and have incentive to see you succeed. In return, we are investing $1.5m at a time when ATOM - which will fund this - is near all time lows. There is give and take.
$500k is set aside as a bonus. Whatever Stargaze makes for the Hub - in the form of transaction fees - the Hub should pay to you at the end of the year, up to $500k. This gives you incentive to not launch these products, make a little money, have monthly payments, and then not aggressively seek out the launch of new good NFT collections. We need you guys to be locked in on generating more volume, and the Hub should reward you for this (including after this year!)
With these changes, I am in support.